So yeah, this guy was talking about how a game focused entirely on PvP has a niche audience. PvP focused games are obviously extremely popular. But are RvR only games extremely popular? I feel like the person that keeps getting raked over the coals was referring to PvP only MMORPGs, as that is really what we are discussing in general here. And I don't think he is too far off the mark in saying that.
That was why I mentioned he should've been a little more specific ha. It came off as a very strange post.
We shall see. I would love to participate in 500 player battles, so long as it wasn't a matter of death ball vs. death ball, who wins the race to zero.
The TTK in the game will need to be relatively longer, while healing relatively weaker. That way you can't depend on full heals every 5 seconds, but you won't have half your raid group go down in that same amount of time. More like a mini-war of attrition. That would be fun.
Well have you read the information on classes in the game? How each healer heals and how everything in combat comes with a price. Take for example: http://camelotunchained.com/v3/realms/vikings/stonehealer/ We were able to destroy those stones that were on the ground.
If you go through and read each of the classes and their abilities, you will see the brilliance of the class balancing. Unfortunately a few people in the testing were complaining about balancing the preset classes we are testing with, kind of an eye rolling thing that happened there.
In this video there is a lil bit of gameplay footage from CSE livestream, from yesterdays testing gameplay starts at 2 minutes.
The gameplay is looking A LOT better than the last time I checked it out, good stuff.
Er, Facebook moved its data to Canada so they could better evade compliance should they so chose, though that of course is not the stated reason.
Compliance is much more than what you stated, the big challenge is that companies have to not only comply with requests to delete user data, but determine which data falls under the regulation and under what circumstances it can or must be deleted.
User consent to use data must be documented, stored, recalled and easily changed should the user request it.
Last but not least, companies have to be able to provide users proof they have complied and actually deleted the data from any system it might reside on, including login, billing, game databases, marketing or any data shared with 3rd party affilates.
There's more to it, and I'd venture to say if you are unaware your firm is likely not compliant yet.
Oh yes, I work for a major financial institution in the Compliance Technology group....but we are spinning off topic now.
I had a couple of threads running back in May which were more appropriate for this conversation.
I said TDLR; didn't I To keep things simple.
For game companies like the this one, it doesn't have to be all that complicated, since they can leave all billing to a third party supplier who is already compliant. So all they are left with is just basic User Account info ( Username, password, Full Name, birthdate, address, phone, email, payment method and (subscription) payment status ). Yes. Things will become much more complicated when you start doing the billing yourself, become overly greedy with a huge game cash shop and loot boxes, etc. Well... greed always comes at a time consuming cost.
PS. And of course Facebook pulled all it's data to evade the GDPR. That should be obvious isn't. As right now, all people who deleted their facebook accounts, their data is still there and not actually deleted. This has been known secret for years that Facebook retains all your data and doesn't delete anything, just the link to your profile!
So yeah, this guy was talking about how a game focused entirely on PvP has a niche audience. PvP focused games are obviously extremely popular. But are RvR only games extremely popular? I feel like the person that keeps getting raked over the coals was referring to PvP only MMORPGs, as that is really what we are discussing in general here. And I don't think he is too far off the mark in saying that.
That was why I mentioned he should've been a little more specific ha. It came off as a very strange post.
We shall see. I would love to participate in 500 player battles, so long as it wasn't a matter of death ball vs. death ball, who wins the race to zero.
The TTK in the game will need to be relatively longer, while healing relatively weaker. That way you can't depend on full heals every 5 seconds, but you won't have half your raid group go down in that same amount of time. More like a mini-war of attrition. That would be fun.
Well have you read the information on classes in the game? How each healer heals and how everything in combat comes with a price. Take for example: http://camelotunchained.com/v3/realms/vikings/stonehealer/ We were able to destroy those stones that were on the ground.
If you go through and read each of the classes and their abilities, you will see the brilliance of the class balancing. Unfortunately a few people in the testing were complaining about balancing the preset classes we are testing with, kind of an eye rolling thing that happened there.
In this video there is a lil bit of gameplay footage from CSE livestream, from yesterdays testing gameplay starts at 2 minutes.
The gameplay is looking A LOT better than the last time I checked it out, good stuff.
The animations still seem unnatural to me...stiff and not fluid. Maybe it will grow on me...
All time classic MY NEW FAVORITE POST! (Keep laying those bricks)
"I should point out that no other company has shipped out a beta on a disc before this." - Official Mortal Online Lead Community Moderator
Proudly wearing the Harbinger badge since Dec 23, 2017.
Coined the phrase "Role-Playing a Development Team" January 2018
"Oddly Slap is the main reason I stay in these forums." - Mystichaze April 9th 2018
The GDPR was widely advertised, all the big companies were sending emails and alerts to confirm, It was impossible to be oblivious to it, even I just owning a community website having to do all sorts of changes in the software level because we're forced to comply by the new rights people have.
The GDPR is not a bad thing actually, thanks to it you have rights on your privacy and data that US citizens can only dream of.
But on the case of CU specifically, only the fact they have things like a newsletter already forced them to comply by the GDPR by its deadline in May, so to only notice it at the last minute is RIP.
So yeah, this guy was talking about how a game focused entirely on PvP has a niche audience. PvP focused games are obviously extremely popular. But are RvR only games extremely popular? I feel like the person that keeps getting raked over the coals was referring to PvP only MMORPGs, as that is really what we are discussing in general here. And I don't think he is too far off the mark in saying that.
That was why I mentioned he should've been a little more specific ha. It came off as a very strange post.
We shall see. I would love to participate in 500 player battles, so long as it wasn't a matter of death ball vs. death ball, who wins the race to zero.
The TTK in the game will need to be relatively longer, while healing relatively weaker. That way you can't depend on full heals every 5 seconds, but you won't have half your raid group go down in that same amount of time. More like a mini-war of attrition. That would be fun.
Yeah, you were absolutely open to him amending his position. There were others that were not so much like that.
Anyway, I'm super curious to see what they pull off and am definitely going to play it. I just have doubts about all the popularity talk being tossed around. Someone said 100k earlier and I could see that 4 months after an initial 300 - 500k. Sometimes I get the feeling people think this is going to be the greatest PvP game ever devised. But I think it really is more niche. Just an opinion though.
That's definitely a reasonable position to take, considering the current landscape. There's a fine line to tread. I'm interested to see a true MMORPG completely focused on large-scale RvR. What will "completely focused" even mean, specifically, for new players? Old players? Casual players? Hardcore players?
One thing I will give him credit for: MJ had a vision for the game, and he's stuck to that vision without adding things all willy nilly that aren't really part of the original vision.
CSE wants to take money from Euros. That's why they're complying. Anyone else in the US and elsewhere can do all sorts of tawdry things with your data, and they are.
The way this works is simple, if you offer services to European citizens, you must obey by this regulations, this changes a very core thing, where the Terms of Service of a company can no longer overcome the regulation of data.
On our service we had to make several software changes, the most core of them all is a system to allow users to permanently delete their data at their will (the right to erasure), the ability to give one user all their data exported from our services (the right to portability), and the usual changes to ensure consent on newsletters and what it's done with their data (the right to be informed).
The bloody E.U. isn't happy banning cucumbers and sending jihadis to decapitate people in the street, oh no, now they've delayed my Camelot Unchained beta!
Well, up yours Junker, up yours Barnier, up yours Merkle, keep calm and carry on MJ but most of all God save the Queen!
Total drivel as the equivalent has been passed by the UK!
All EU legislation is a compromise agreed by all of the governments. Once agreed its published,all governments have another check and when there are no changes all the (sovereign) parliaments (UK included) pass the legislation. All of them. And if there are any changes requested ... back to square one essentially. There is no deadline so up to a year is not unusal for the final - published - version to be agreed by all countries.
When every nation passes the proposed regulations there is an implementation period.
So its not as though this didn't appear suddenly at the last minute!
So this is either a) an excuse or b) they were ignoring the old EU regulation and assuming US laws (what there is!) would do or c) blindly ignoring the public's demand for data protection. Or all three. Nor is ignorance of the law an excuse as MJ will know! (And I am sure its not down to incompetance.)
Remember the reason for the regulation? Multiple hacks in multiple countries on multiple companies of peoples private data ... and lots of people getting very, very upset. And I am sure CU will want to hold peoples billing details ........
More than ever in the EU a ToS saying not liable for any loss incurred and if you disagree sue us court. Which is the default US approach.
Compared to the US the EU, imo, has gotten of lightly. Which may be due to the old data protection acts. The UK, GE, France etc. passed their own national version 20 or 30 years ago and these were eventually all collected and a common EU standard over a decade ago.
Companies prefer one standard!
And if CU is going to be sold in the EU - as well as the US etc. - they have a choice. Make one version of the game for everyone or make one for the EU, one for the US - maybe take it off line in the UK in a year or so since maybe they will have some special needs that have to be met etc.
Again most companies prefer to just have the one set of regulations to meet. So .....
"They said they could call it beta and put it out but it's not 100% what they promised. They need time to get the crash rate down a pinch and a small amount of polish. They said if they didn't have to do the new euro regulations, they feel they would have hit it".
What regulations? I read through the first page of posts and someone said it was just privacy stuff. If so, did the game have coded-in systems that sold personal information? If not, then couldn't they just not sell private information, or share it? Not doing something shouldn't cause a delay. Not doing something should give them more time logically.
What I'd really like information on is these EU regulations because I am having a hard time understanding this if it really is just protecting privacy rights.
The bloody E.U. isn't happy banning cucumbers and sending jihadis to decapitate people in the street, oh no, now they've delayed my Camelot Unchained beta!
Well, up yours Junker, up yours Barnier, up yours Merkle, keep calm and carry on MJ but most of all God save the Queen!
Total drivel as the equivalent has been passed by the UK!
All EU legislation is a compromise agreed by all of the governments. Once agreed its published,all governments have another check and when there are no changes all the (sovereign) parliaments (UK included) pass the legislation. All of them. And if there are any changes requested ... back to square one essentially. There is no deadline so up to a year is not unusal.
When every nation passes the proposed common law - theer is an implementation period.
So its not as though this didn't appear suddenly.
So this is a) an excuse or b) ignoring the old EU regulation and assuming US law was good enough or c) blindly ignoring the public demand for data protection. Or all three.
Remember the reason for the regulation? Multiple hacks in multiple countries of peoples private data ... and lots of people getting very, very upset. And I am sure CU will want to hold peoples billing details ........
Compared to the US the EU, imo, has gotten of lightly. Which may be due to the old data protection acts. The UK, GE, France etc. passed their own national version 20 or 30 years ago and these were eventually all collected and a common EU standard over a decade ago.
Companies prefer one standard!
And if CU is going to be sold in the EU - as well as the US etc. - they have a choice. Make one version of the game for everyone or make one for the EU, one for the US - maybe take it off line in the UK in a year or so since maybe they will have some special needs that have to be met etc.
Again most companies prefer to just have the one set of regulations to meet. So .....
One choice? You may not remember, but when DAOC launched they let 3rd party distrbutors run their own servers in EU and Japan.
Eventually both of those folded and Mythic took on the customer for both.
Most of the Japanese players were migrated to my server, MLF and I had some great dungeon runs as a primary healer for a group I could not actually speak to.
Just trying to live long enough to play a new, released MMORPG, playing New Worlds atm
Fools find no pleasure in understanding but delight in airing their own opinions. Pvbs 18:2, NIV
Don't just play games, inhabit virtual worlds™
"This is the most intelligent, well qualified and articulate response to a post I have ever seen on these forums. It's a shame most people here won't have the attention span to read past the second line." - Anon
"They said they could call it beta and put it out but it's not 100% what they promised. They need time to get the crash rate down a pinch and a small amount of polish. They said if they didn't have to do the new euro regulations, they feel they would have hit it".
What regulations? I read through the first page of posts and someone said it was just privacy stuff. If so, did the game have coded-in systems that sold personal information? If not, then couldn't they just not sell private information, or share it? Not doing something shouldn't cause a delay. Not doing something should give them more time logically.
What I'd really like information on is these EU regulations because I am having a hard time understanding this if it really is just protecting privacy rights.
CU undoubtedly stores financial information (Debit/credit cards) as well as the PII needed to verify charges to those cards. Would you rather your card and billing information NOT be subject to privacy rules?
Its been rather amusing watching everyone and their blog doing a Chinese fire drill over the new EU regulations. I've not seen so much reflexive CYA since the last major intrusion into one of the corps data bases.
Of course No Such will totally ignore them, and the EU will pointedly not attempt to do anything about it.
"They said they could call it beta and put it out but it's not 100% what they promised. They need time to get the crash rate down a pinch and a small amount of polish. They said if they didn't have to do the new euro regulations, they feel they would have hit it".
What regulations? I read through the first page of posts and someone said it was just privacy stuff. If so, did the game have coded-in systems that sold personal information? If not, then couldn't they just not sell private information, or share it? Not doing something shouldn't cause a delay. Not doing something should give them more time logically.
What I'd really like information on is these EU regulations because I am having a hard time understanding this if it really is just protecting privacy rights.
CU undoubtedly stores financial information (Debit/credit cards) as well as the PII needed to verify charges to those cards. Would you rather your card and billing information NOT be subject to privacy rules?
Any info which could be tied to the actual user qualifies so in some situations user aliases and even IP addresses (if static) have to be protected.
Just trying to live long enough to play a new, released MMORPG, playing New Worlds atm
Fools find no pleasure in understanding but delight in airing their own opinions. Pvbs 18:2, NIV
Don't just play games, inhabit virtual worlds™
"This is the most intelligent, well qualified and articulate response to a post I have ever seen on these forums. It's a shame most people here won't have the attention span to read past the second line." - Anon
They can take their sweet time really cuz the game will be DOA regardless. No matter how nice a guy that head Dev is, this game will only be a tiny niche game and will be lucky to last a year after launch. Also, "unchained" is a really dated, stupid name.
This game is attempting to do something no other multiplayer game to date has ever done effectively; large scale battles. If Camelot Unchained can pull off 500 players in the same castle siege, I think it'll be around for a while.
I highly disagree. First of all, those willing to play a game focused ENTIRELY on PvP will be a tiny group in the first place. I think This will be a game for mid to hardcore PvP gamers. You will likely have very few casuals, although they will show up to see what it's like. That small population will only get smaller (as is the case with all MMOs). This game is gonna be so niche that I fear it will alienate itself, especially since PvP is such a niche thing in itself.
I don't hope they fail. All successes in the MMO field are successes for us all (companies will be willing to plop down more money for more games the more successful they are). But I cannot see an RvRvR game, having little to no PvE things to do, holding anyone's attention long.
"Niche...." chuckle, that's cute. Yes this info is from 2013, just trying to stay at pace...=P
"PvP can double game revenue
The study shows a clear trend in game revenues. Players are more likely to spend money if they can engage in player vs player mode. Whereas life-time ARPPU for single-player games cluster around $5-$10, PvP games range $20-$350.
At the very least, developing a multiplayer game will double your revenue.
PvP really takes the spotlight in the RPG genre. Considering an engaged player base, +50 play sessions, multiplayer RPGs has x5 ARPU than single-player RPG games and x25 ARPU than single-player non RPG games." - source ` https://www.slideshare.net/DavidPChiu/kongregate-digital-taipei-2013
"They said they could call it beta and put it out but it's not 100% what they promised. They need time to get the crash rate down a pinch and a small amount of polish. They said if they didn't have to do the new euro regulations, they feel they would have hit it".
What regulations? I read through the first page of posts and someone said it was just privacy stuff. If so, did the game have coded-in systems that sold personal information? If not, then couldn't they just not sell private information, or share it? Not doing something shouldn't cause a delay. Not doing something should give them more time logically.
What I'd really like information on is these EU regulations because I am having a hard time understanding this if it really is just protecting privacy rights.
CU undoubtedly stores financial information (Debit/credit cards) as well as the PII needed to verify charges to those cards. Would you rather your card and billing information NOT be subject to privacy rules?
No. Of course not. Why would you have such an irrational and hostile reaction to my simple question?
Are you saying that outside of the EU there are no privacy rules and the US version of this game isn't going to protect my CC or other personal datadata? What specifically regarding the EU rules caused the delay. What is different?
I want none of my private information shared to anyone for any reason. I just see a lot of hyperbole and nonsense and little actual facts.
I am not a coder. I know nothing about coding. But a delay means something had to be changed or removed. What was it? If it is something like data sharing coded into the game, like ESO recently did, that they removed only for the EU version - I want to know.
"They said they could call it beta and put it out but it's not 100% what they promised. They need time to get the crash rate down a pinch and a small amount of polish. They said if they didn't have to do the new euro regulations, they feel they would have hit it".
What regulations? I read through the first page of posts and someone said it was just privacy stuff. If so, did the game have coded-in systems that sold personal information? If not, then couldn't they just not sell private information, or share it? Not doing something shouldn't cause a delay. Not doing something should give them more time logically.
What I'd really like information on is these EU regulations because I am having a hard time understanding this if it really is just protecting privacy rights.
CU undoubtedly stores financial information (Debit/credit cards) as well as the PII needed to verify charges to those cards. Would you rather your card and billing information NOT be subject to privacy rules?
No. Of course not. Why would you have such an irrational and hostile reaction to my simple question?
Are you saying that outside of the EU there are no privacy rules and the US version of this game isn't going to protect my CC or other personal datadata? What specifically regarding the EU rules caused the delay. What is different?
I want none of my private information shared to anyone for any reason. I just see a lot of hyperbole and nonsense and little actual facts.
I am not a coder. I know nothing about coding. But a delay means something had to be changed or removed. What was it? If it is something like data sharing coded into the game, like ESO recently did, that they removed only for the EU version - I want to know.
As I understand it, the EU regulations are more strict. They have to be ready to completely purge the data at the consumer's request, as well as a host of other, more consumer-friendly regulations. If CU wasn't using a system that was already compliant with the more stringent regulations, either they would have to substantially change the way that system handled the data, or move it to another system that is more compliant. I'm not sure it would make sense to attempt to split the way some of it's handled (EU customers vs. US customers), so they likely migrated all their customer data if they had to. I'm not sure how they resolved the issue, though.
That's my understanding of it. Though, as others have mentioned, it's not like they didn't know the potential for the GDPR to go into effect wasn't there a while ago. Seems most companies took the wait and see approach.
"They said they could call it beta and put it out but it's not 100% what they promised. They need time to get the crash rate down a pinch and a small amount of polish. They said if they didn't have to do the new euro regulations, they feel they would have hit it".
What regulations? I read through the first page of posts and someone said it was just privacy stuff. If so, did the game have coded-in systems that sold personal information? If not, then couldn't they just not sell private information, or share it? Not doing something shouldn't cause a delay. Not doing something should give them more time logically.
What I'd really like information on is these EU regulations because I am having a hard time understanding this if it really is just protecting privacy rights.
CU undoubtedly stores financial information (Debit/credit cards) as well as the PII needed to verify charges to those cards. Would you rather your card and billing information NOT be subject to privacy rules?
No. Of course not. Why would you have such an irrational and hostile reaction to my simple question?
Are you saying that outside of the EU there are no privacy rules and the US version of this game isn't going to protect my CC or other personal datadata? What specifically regarding the EU rules caused the delay. What is different?
I want none of my private information shared to anyone for any reason. I just see a lot of hyperbole and nonsense and little actual facts.
I am not a coder. I know nothing about coding. But a delay means something had to be changed or removed. What was it? If it is something like data sharing coded into the game, like ESO recently did, that they removed only for the EU version - I want to know.
As I understand it, the EU regulations are more strict. They have to be ready to completely purge the data at the consumer's request, as well as a host of other, more consumer-friendly regulations. If CU wasn't using a system that was already compliant with the more stringent regulations, either they would have to substantially change the way that system handled the data, or move it to another system that is more compliant. I'm not sure it would make sense to attempt to split the way some of it's handled (EU customers vs. US customers), so they likely migrated all their customer data if they had to. I'm not sure how they resolved the issue, though.
That's my understanding of it. Though, as others have mentioned, it's not like they didn't know the potential for the GDPR to go into effect wasn't there a while ago. Seems most companies took the wait and see approach.
Other than having simple, intelligible consent and not long "terms and conditions" that wouldn't really cause a delay, the only thing I can find that would cause a major delay would be this-
"Article 23 calls for controllers to hold and process only the data absolutely necessary for the completion of its duties (data minimisation), as well as limiting the access to personal data to those needing to act out the processing."
I hope this means whatever they are doing to minimize data collection for the EU will apply to the US/NA.
I also don't understand how this would impact a beta launch, unless they had a system like ESO "mistakenly" put in to collect data. Does this beta allow purchases within game? If not, I don't see why a game's client beta would be impacted by any of it.
"They said they could call it beta and put it out but it's not 100% what they promised. They need time to get the crash rate down a pinch and a small amount of polish. They said if they didn't have to do the new euro regulations, they feel they would have hit it".
What regulations? I read through the first page of posts and someone said it was just privacy stuff. If so, did the game have coded-in systems that sold personal information? If not, then couldn't they just not sell private information, or share it? Not doing something shouldn't cause a delay. Not doing something should give them more time logically.
What I'd really like information on is these EU regulations because I am having a hard time understanding this if it really is just protecting privacy rights.
CU undoubtedly stores financial information (Debit/credit cards) as well as the PII needed to verify charges to those cards. Would you rather your card and billing information NOT be subject to privacy rules?
No. Of course not. Why would you have such an irrational and hostile reaction to my simple question?
Are you saying that outside of the EU there are no privacy rules and the US version of this game isn't going to protect my CC or other personal datadata? What specifically regarding the EU rules caused the delay. What is different?
I want none of my private information shared to anyone for any reason. I just see a lot of hyperbole and nonsense and little actual facts.
I am not a coder. I know nothing about coding. But a delay means something had to be changed or removed. What was it? If it is something like data sharing coded into the game, like ESO recently did, that they removed only for the EU version - I want to know.
As I understand it, the EU regulations are more strict. They have to be ready to completely purge the data at the consumer's request, as well as a host of other, more consumer-friendly regulations. If CU wasn't using a system that was already compliant with the more stringent regulations, either they would have to substantially change the way that system handled the data, or move it to another system that is more compliant. I'm not sure it would make sense to attempt to split the way some of it's handled (EU customers vs. US customers), so they likely migrated all their customer data if they had to. I'm not sure how they resolved the issue, though.
That's my understanding of it. Though, as others have mentioned, it's not like they didn't know the potential for the GDPR to go into effect wasn't there a while ago. Seems most companies took the wait and see approach.
Other than having simple, intelligible consent and not long "terms and conditions" that wouldn't really cause a delay, the only thing I can find that would cause a major delay would be this-
"Article 23 calls for controllers to hold and process only the data absolutely necessary for the completion of its duties (data minimisation), as well as limiting the access to personal data to those needing to act out the processing."
I hope this means whatever they are doing to minimize data collection for the EU will apply to the US/NA.
I also don't understand how this would impact a beta launch, unless they had a system like ESO "mistakenly" put in to collect data. Does this beta allow purchases within game? If not, I don't see why a game's client beta would be impacted by any of it.
You actually left out what might be the crux of it at the beginning of the paragraph you cite. The system cannot provide the privacy as an addition to an already existing system; it must be built from the ground up to include the privacy requirements needed to comply with GDPR. If the system they were using was not built from the ground up to meet the GDPR standards, they would've had to migrate to a new system for storing PII and other consumer information.
Not saying that's it, but that's one way I immediately spotted a problem arising that would take time to correct.
If there's one thing you can count on with this development team, it's that you can't count on them to meet a deadline. Ahh, how I long for the days of truly professional MMO teams with publishers. Who would have guessed?
I'm trying to recall exactly when those days were and for which MMORPGs?
Seems almost all of them suffered from multiple delays, bad launches, missing content, poor optimization, uninspired designs, broken promises and sometimes failed games.
So again, when were these great "AAA" days?
In the before time.
Before cash shops, early access, kickstarter, and everything else that has lead to selling pre-pre-alpha and anything they can put a price tag on.
Obviously there were still problems back then, but compared to now...
Then it was all behind garden walls. Now it's all in the open. That's the difference between development then and now.
Enter the double-edged sword, crowd-funding. Most gamers can't handle real development and testing. What made them think paying into would make that more palatable? Maybe the desired to be sold something cool obfuscated that.
No. The only reason there is more transparency is because they are willing to sell buggy, untested, half finished games in earlier and earlier states of development. Right up to taking your money in cash shops for games that do not exist yet.
lol you're an angry bitter person so in need to be right that you're arguing with me even though you essentially reiterated what I said.
Well then on that note I'll just say I support CU because of it's no cash shop policy. Along with offering refunds.
"You CAN'T buy ships for RL money." - MaxBacon
"classification of games into MMOs is not by rational reasoning" - nariusseldon
What people are overlooking is we are still getting the beta 1 patch, however it is not beta 1 phase, to coin MJ's phrase "not the beta". What we as testers got out of the deal is more play time, as opposed to a shorter playtime of the beta 1 phase.
The NDA is still in effect, meaning you can't stream or distribute the content, but we are free to speak about the testing in general terms, as it so happens even with the memory leak crashing that is still occurring, people are having fun.
I think what the team are actually doing is they are going to launch the beta 1 patch, make sure it's stabilized, then officially announce beta 1 phase. (this is just my opinion) Given how first impressions these days can make or break a game, probably a smart move on their part.
Because of the fact mmo players expect a fully polished actual beta (they did build this with their own engine), and these players have no real experience with legitimate alpha and beta testing, demanding a game launch in a shitty state, rather than waiting for a more stable launch, is idiotic to say the least.
You actually left out what might be the crux of it at the beginning of the paragraph you cite. The system cannot provide the privacy as an addition to an already existing system; it must be built from the ground up to include the privacy requirements needed to comply with GDPR. If the system they were using was not built from the ground up to meet the GDPR standards, they would've had to migrate to a new system for storing PII and other consumer information.
Not saying that's it, but that's one way I immediately spotted a problem arising that would take time to correct.
But that assumes they have a reason for the PII information being tied to the beta client. Are there purchases allowed in-game during the beta? If not, why is any of it tied to the client?
I agree they would have to change their database and storage, but that wouldn't involve moving game developers to work on it I wouldn't think. One person above stated the "beta" patch is being released and just the beta date being pushed back, which makes me think the delay was, rightfully, on the admin side/non-game dev side. The changes in data storage/collection took up admin/non-game dev hours, and not game dev hours.
But what I still want to know from the horses mouth is that they didn't have and won't have any of the ESO data collection crap in the game in the US/NA.
I have to say, I like the key elements of GDRP. I hope we can pass something like that in the US.
You actually left out what might be the crux of it at the beginning of the paragraph you cite. The system cannot provide the privacy as an addition to an already existing system; it must be built from the ground up to include the privacy requirements needed to comply with GDPR. If the system they were using was not built from the ground up to meet the GDPR standards, they would've had to migrate to a new system for storing PII and other consumer information.
Not saying that's it, but that's one way I immediately spotted a problem arising that would take time to correct.
But that assumes they have a reason for the PII information being tied to the beta client. Are there purchases allowed in-game during the beta? If not, why is any of it tied to the client?
I agree they would have to change their database and storage, but that wouldn't involve moving game developers to work on it I wouldn't think. One person above stated the "beta" patch is being released and just the beta date being pushed back, which makes me think the delay was, rightfully, on the admin side/non-game dev side. The changes in data storage/collection took up admin/non-game dev hours, and not game dev hours.
But what I still want to know from the horses mouth is that they didn't have and won't have any of the ESO data collection crap in the game in the US/NA.
I have to say, I like the key elements of GDRP. I hope we can pass something like that in the US.
True enough, I don't know enough about the technical side to say for sure.
GDPR will be hard to pass here in US. Telecommunications is one of the largest lobbiers of Congress. Here in the US, it's money that talks until you reach a tipping point where Americans finally realize that exercising their civic duty to steer their government is probably a good idea.... But then, right after we get any change to that one thing we got mad about, we go right back to Instagramming pictures of our dinners and our dogs and forget all about that boring thing in D.C. named Congress.
They can take their sweet time really cuz the game will be DOA regardless. No matter how nice a guy that head Dev is, this game will only be a tiny niche game and will be lucky to last a year after launch. Also, "unchained" is a really dated, stupid name.
This game is attempting to do something no other multiplayer game to date has ever done effectively; large scale battles. If Camelot Unchained can pull off 500 players in the same castle siege, I think it'll be around for a while.
I highly disagree. First of all, those willing to play a game focused ENTIRELY on PvP will be a tiny group in the first place. I think This will be a game for mid to hardcore PvP gamers. You will likely have very few casuals, although they will show up to see what it's like. That small population will only get smaller (as is the case with all MMOs). This game is gonna be so niche that I fear it will alienate itself, especially since PvP is such a niche thing in itself.
I don't hope they fail. All successes in the MMO field are successes for us all (companies will be willing to plop down more money for more games the more successful they are). But I cannot see an RvRvR game, having little to no PvE things to do, holding anyone's attention long.
"Niche...." chuckle, that's cute. Yes this info is from 2013, just trying to stay at pace...=P
"PvP can double game revenue
The study shows a clear trend in game revenues. Players are more likely to spend money if they can engage in player vs player mode. Whereas life-time ARPPU for single-player games cluster around $5-$10, PvP games range $20-$350.
At the very least, developing a multiplayer game will double your revenue.
PvP really takes the spotlight in the RPG genre. Considering an engaged player base, +50 play sessions, multiplayer RPGs has x5 ARPU than single-player RPG games and x25 ARPU than single-player non RPG games." - source ` https://www.slideshare.net/DavidPChiu/kongregate-digital-taipei-2013
Why doesn't it factor longevity. What we see are most pvp games with little longevity. Is it the big boys carrying those numbers? And Kongregate really? Nothing more relevant than that?
Dark Age of Camelot is still a sub based game, even with EA taking over.
I think a lot of people are disappointed and some of the comments reflect that.
Keep in mind that MJ created 2 really good pvp games. OK endless city seiges sucked, but warhammer tier 3 pvp was great. And EA is responsible for not letting him make the game he wanted to make.
Daoc is the greatest game ever. Took me 11 years to finally get sick of playing it, and mainly only because populations are low and EA screwed the game up.
MJ spent millions of dollars of his OWN money on this game. It's gonna be great, and have depth like daoc did.
As far as PvP games not doing well, that i think is something that has always been changing. What i mean is that once you experience some good pvp, you cant really have fun killing raid bosses that do the same thing every time, it gets boring.
Pvp is where its at. Especially 3 faction pvp games like daoc, planetside, and now camelot unchained.
I think a lot of people get turned off by free-for-all pvp where pvp and pve are mixed. As a hardcore pvp player i personally hate that kind of pvp. But there is nothing more fun than properly designed PvP and MJ is a MASTER at that.
Comments
For game companies like the this one, it doesn't have to be all that complicated, since they can leave all billing to a third party supplier who is already compliant.
So all they are left with is just basic User Account info ( Username, password, Full Name, birthdate, address, phone, email, payment method and (subscription) payment status ).
Yes. Things will become much more complicated when you start doing the billing yourself, become overly greedy with a huge game cash shop and loot boxes, etc.
Well... greed always comes at a time consuming cost.
PS. And of course Facebook pulled all it's data to evade the GDPR. That should be obvious isn't.
As right now, all people who deleted their facebook accounts, their data is still there and not actually deleted. This has been known secret for years that Facebook retains all your data and doesn't delete anything, just the link to your profile!
All time classic MY NEW FAVORITE POST! (Keep laying those bricks)
"I should point out that no other company has shipped out a beta on a disc before this." - Official Mortal Online Lead Community Moderator
Proudly wearing the Harbinger badge since Dec 23, 2017.
Coined the phrase "Role-Playing a Development Team" January 2018
"Oddly Slap is the main reason I stay in these forums." - Mystichaze April 9th 2018
The GDPR is not a bad thing actually, thanks to it you have rights on your privacy and data that US citizens can only dream of.
But on the case of CU specifically, only the fact they have things like a newsletter already forced them to comply by the GDPR by its deadline in May, so to only notice it at the last minute is RIP.
One thing I will give him credit for: MJ had a vision for the game, and he's stuck to that vision without adding things all willy nilly that aren't really part of the original vision.
On our service we had to make several software changes, the most core of them all is a system to allow users to permanently delete their data at their will (the right to erasure), the ability to give one user all their data exported from our services (the right to portability), and the usual changes to ensure consent on newsletters and what it's done with their data (the right to be informed).
Clearly its all EU regulations fault that they failed to deliver beta on 4th of july. Down with EU and glory to Arstotzka!
All EU legislation is a compromise agreed by all of the governments. Once agreed its published,all governments have another check and when there are no changes all the (sovereign) parliaments (UK included) pass the legislation. All of them. And if there are any changes requested ... back to square one essentially. There is no deadline so up to a year is not unusal for the final - published - version to be agreed by all countries.
When every nation passes the proposed regulations there is an implementation period.
So its not as though this didn't appear suddenly at the last minute!
So this is either a) an excuse or b) they were ignoring the old EU regulation and assuming US laws (what there is!) would do or c) blindly ignoring the public's demand for data protection. Or all three. Nor is ignorance of the law an excuse as MJ will know! (And I am sure its not down to incompetance.)
Remember the reason for the regulation? Multiple hacks in multiple countries on multiple companies of peoples private data ... and lots of people getting very, very upset. And I am sure CU will want to hold peoples billing details ........
More than ever in the EU a ToS saying not liable for any loss incurred and if you disagree sue us court. Which is the default US approach.
Compared to the US the EU, imo, has gotten of lightly. Which may be due to the old data protection acts. The UK, GE, France etc. passed their own national version 20 or 30 years ago and these were eventually all collected and a common EU standard over a decade ago.
Companies prefer one standard!
And if CU is going to be sold in the EU - as well as the US etc. - they have a choice. Make one version of the game for everyone or make one for the EU, one for the US - maybe take it off line in the UK in a year or so since maybe they will have some special needs that have to be met etc.
Again most companies prefer to just have the one set of regulations to meet. So .....
What regulations? I read through the first page of posts and someone said it was just privacy stuff. If so, did the game have coded-in systems that sold personal information? If not, then couldn't they just not sell private information, or share it? Not doing something shouldn't cause a delay. Not doing something should give them more time logically.
What I'd really like information on is these EU regulations because I am having a hard time understanding this if it really is just protecting privacy rights.
Eventually both of those folded and Mythic took on the customer for both.
Most of the Japanese players were migrated to my server, MLF and I had some great dungeon runs as a primary healer for a group I could not actually speak to.
Yeah, I am just that good.
"True friends stab you in the front." | Oscar Wilde
"I need to finish" - Christian Wolff: The Accountant
Just trying to live long enough to play a new, released MMORPG, playing New Worlds atm
Fools find no pleasure in understanding but delight in airing their own opinions. Pvbs 18:2, NIV
Don't just play games, inhabit virtual worlds™
"This is the most intelligent, well qualified and articulate response to a post I have ever seen on these forums. It's a shame most people here won't have the attention span to read past the second line." - Anon
"True friends stab you in the front." | Oscar Wilde
"I need to finish" - Christian Wolff: The Accountant
Just trying to live long enough to play a new, released MMORPG, playing New Worlds atm
Fools find no pleasure in understanding but delight in airing their own opinions. Pvbs 18:2, NIV
Don't just play games, inhabit virtual worlds™
"This is the most intelligent, well qualified and articulate response to a post I have ever seen on these forums. It's a shame most people here won't have the attention span to read past the second line." - Anon
"Niche...." chuckle, that's cute. Yes this info is from 2013, just trying to stay at pace...=P
"PvP can double game revenue
The study shows a clear trend in game revenues. Players are more likely to spend money if they can engage in player vs player mode. Whereas life-time ARPPU for single-player games cluster around $5-$10, PvP games range $20-$350.
At the very least, developing a multiplayer game will double your revenue.
PvP really takes the spotlight in the RPG genre. Considering an engaged player base, +50 play sessions, multiplayer RPGs has x5 ARPU than single-player RPG games and x25 ARPU than single-player non RPG games." - source ` https://www.slideshare.net/DavidPChiu/kongregate-digital-taipei-2013
Are you saying that outside of the EU there are no privacy rules and the US version of this game isn't going to protect my CC or other personal datadata? What specifically regarding the EU rules caused the delay. What is different?
I want none of my private information shared to anyone for any reason. I just see a lot of hyperbole and nonsense and little actual facts.
I am not a coder. I know nothing about coding. But a delay means something had to be changed or removed. What was it? If it is something like data sharing coded into the game, like ESO recently did, that they removed only for the EU version - I want to know.
That's my understanding of it. Though, as others have mentioned, it's not like they didn't know the potential for the GDPR to go into effect wasn't there a while ago. Seems most companies took the wait and see approach.
Other than having simple, intelligible consent and not long "terms and conditions" that wouldn't really cause a delay, the only thing I can find that would cause a major delay would be this-
"Article 23 calls for controllers to hold and process only the data absolutely necessary for the completion of its duties (data minimisation), as well as limiting the access to personal data to those needing to act out the processing."
I hope this means whatever they are doing to minimize data collection for the EU will apply to the US/NA.
I also don't understand how this would impact a beta launch, unless they had a system like ESO "mistakenly" put in to collect data. Does this beta allow purchases within game? If not, I don't see why a game's client beta would be impacted by any of it.
Not saying that's it, but that's one way I immediately spotted a problem arising that would take time to correct.
"classification of games into MMOs is not by rational reasoning" - nariusseldon
Love Minecraft. And check out my Youtube channel OhCanadaGamer
Try a MUD today at http://www.mudconnect.com/The NDA is still in effect, meaning you can't stream or distribute the content, but we are free to speak about the testing in general terms, as it so happens even with the memory leak crashing that is still occurring, people are having fun.
I think what the team are actually doing is they are going to launch the beta 1 patch, make sure it's stabilized, then officially announce beta 1 phase. (this is just my opinion) Given how first impressions these days can make or break a game, probably a smart move on their part.
Because of the fact mmo players expect a fully polished actual beta (they did build this with their own engine), and these players have no real experience with legitimate alpha and beta testing, demanding a game launch in a shitty state, rather than waiting for a more stable launch, is idiotic to say the least.
I agree they would have to change their database and storage, but that wouldn't involve moving game developers to work on it I wouldn't think. One person above stated the "beta" patch is being released and just the beta date being pushed back, which makes me think the delay was, rightfully, on the admin side/non-game dev side. The changes in data storage/collection took up admin/non-game dev hours, and not game dev hours.
But what I still want to know from the horses mouth is that they didn't have and won't have any of the ESO data collection crap in the game in the US/NA.
I have to say, I like the key elements of GDRP. I hope we can pass something like that in the US.
GDPR will be hard to pass here in US. Telecommunications is one of the largest lobbiers of Congress. Here in the US, it's money that talks until you reach a tipping point where Americans finally realize that exercising their civic duty to steer their government is probably a good idea.... But then, right after we get any change to that one thing we got mad about, we go right back to Instagramming pictures of our dinners and our dogs and forget all about that boring thing in D.C. named Congress.